Critical Evaluation
The common thread in the projects I engaged with for this cycle is their connection to the emerging field of Learning Experience Design (LXD). The term first came about as an integration of the theory and practice between two fields: Instructional Design (ID) and User Experience Design (UX).
Let’s take a look at some common definitions of both fields (both from Wikipedia) :
Instructional design (ID) is the systematic development of instructional specifications using learning and instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction. It is the entire process of analysis of learning needs and goals and the development of a delivery system to meet those needs.
User experience design (UX) is the process of enhancing user satisfaction with a product by improving the usability, accessibility, and pleasure provided in the interaction with the product.
We might see the marriage of these disciplines as a natural byproduct of the shift in education and training from teacher-centered (or instruction-centered) to learner-centered (or learning-centered).
ID provides a multi-disciplinary theoretical knowledge base combining cognitive science, communication, behavior, motivation, learning, psychology, knowledge and media. The theory behind UX has a lot of overlap, with less of a focus on learning and more on usability. With the rise of digital learning experiences, and UX mainly coming out of the software arena, it is clear to see how these two skill and knowledge sets are complimentary.
For the projects outlined here, I tried to use an iterative approach as much as possible. The Gaia U website design, for example, was a very lean process that started with sharing a mind map of the basic architecture of the site, iterating that until it was agreed upon, then using stripped-down rapid prototypes of content page types that generally went through several cycles of feedback and modification until we decided that it was “good enough for now.”
A permaculture principle that came in handy was designing from patterns to details — I would create a page with the basic structure and placement of elements that could be easily rearranged or replaced. I tried my best to only go through the rather tedious and time-consuming processes of alignment, spacing, styling, etc. (the little details) AFTER the basic structure was agreed upon by the team. This I believe resulted in increased efficiency as I did not waste a lot of time redoing these types of tedious tasks in general.
One challenge was that this approach to design was not familiar to everyone involved. It required a constant effort on my part to get crude prototypes properly considered — which necessitates a little bit of imagination on the part of the person giving feedback. There were times when I compromised in order to give the client a clearer picture by including more detail, resulting in spending some time reworking details.
This general trend in design away from the use of linear ‘waterfall’ models and toward non-linear, iterative models is a response to an increasingly complex environment where needs and behaviors are more difficult (or, impossible) to predict. The book Leaving ADDIE for SAM: An Agile Model for Developing the Best Learning Experiences by Michael Allen explores this in-depth as it relates to ID and LXD. Simply put, with complexity comes uncertainty and therefore the increased need for continuous feedback to keep the project aligned with the users’ needs.
Here are some specific ways I applied theories related to LXD to my practice over the course of these projects:
In all learning content, I try to present information with an open-ended tone rather than stating things matter-of-factly. I focus on asking thought provoking questions that give the user a chance to co-create meaning both with the experience itself and with other participants. This approach is inspired by the transaction emphasis of communication theory and social constructionism, which both propose that knowledge and meaning are co-created through interactions — that language is not representative of objective reality. This contrasted with the transmission emphasis, where communication is seen as passing on information from a source to a receiver.
It’s worth mentioning that many learning experiences (especially online) are still very much rooted in the idea that knowledge is transmitted from instructor or expert to learner. In these experiences the learner is expected to passively receive this information and regurgitate it for assessment.
The emphasis on experience in LXD also points to constructivist design theory, which states that knowledge is constructed through a personal interpretation of individual experience. For Living & Learning by Design, I am focusing on creating engaging and interactive experiences rather than just presenting information.
UX, particularly as practiced in the software industry, has also influenced the instructional design approach with more iterative approaches such as Lean and Agile. The classic linear ID design model ADDIE, for example, has begun to lose favor as iterative models such as the Successive Approximation Model (SAM) gain in popularity. As with Lean and Agile, SAM is built around a rapid prototyping approach where design and development cycles are short as to generate continuous feedback. The model also includes some social technologies for including multiple perspective and generating ideas.
Linear design frameworks that rely on analyzing and applying best/good practices work well in simple or even complicated contexts. However, as we move into complexity, solutions become emergent — or unpredictable — and a different approach becomes necessary.
For me, the more I experiment with and reflect on the concept of Learning Experience Design, the more all-encompassing it becomes. The actor Angus T. Jones said “everything is a learning experience.” So LXD might be a professional discipline for some, but it is also a way of looking at and interacting with the world that could be useful for any and all. Through this lens life is created intentionally and designed to evolve continuously. This applies to individual, self-directed learners, or it may apply to leaders and change agents who are capable of creating co-evolutionary experiences for others.
Gaia University has been an enormous inspiration for my work in this field. It has been a great opportunity getting to study and work under such an innovative and progressive learning design. Gaia U’s approach is described as ‘Transformative Action Learning’, which integrates two established theories: transformative learning and action learning.
Both of of these theories and particularly Gaia U’s approach were very influential in my thinking for the ‘7 Principles for Creating Transformative Virtual Learning Experiences’ guide and the pilot course to follow.
Transformative Learning Theory is based on the transformation of perspective. This is something I’ve been interested in for a long time, going back to my undergraduate studies in literature and beyond, though I wasn’t familiar with this theory until more recently. The theory states that this transformation is infrequent, and is usually a result of the following series of events:
1. Disorienting dilemma
2. Self-examination
3. Sense of alienation
4. Relating discontent to others
5. Explaining options of new behavior
6. Building confidence in new ways
7. Planning a course of action
8. Knowledge to implement plans
9. Experimenting with new roles
10. Reintegration.
Being familiar with the structure of the Gaia U program, one could quickly spot the influence of this theory on its design. For my work with helping others create transformative learning experiences, a primary goal is either 1) working to support learners who are already experiencing a disorienting dilemma (which is common on some level with current political/economic/environmental realities), or 2) disrupting a learner’s current worldview intentionally (which is an even larger challenge I think).
Most people coming to Gaia U, for example, have likely already experienced some degree of disorienting dilemma, though intensive work is needed to let go of old patterns fully and move through a process resembling that described above. The one difference, I might add critically, is that the idea of reintegration happening after the design and implementation of action plans is somewhat out of line with leading-edge learning experience design thinking.
On the contrary, the type of learning experience I am interested in (and advocated at Gaia U) involves continuous integration and re-integration — it is not seen as something separated or isolated from the ‘real world’ as learning has been viewed traditionally for some time.
With my work at Wired Roots, my target audience is more mainstream than at Gaia U. Therefore I am likely to have some clients that have not experienced a disorienting dilemma to the same degree. In this case I have to be equipped with tools and techniques to disrupt more in-tact worldviews that might be perpetuating degenerative behaviors and thinking patterns.
A primary focus for the ‘7 Principles…’ guide and the pilot course has been to integrate regenerative design thinking into existing theories associated with learning experience design. This is a seed that was planted at Gaia University, but there hasn’t been any explicit work done to formally integrate these fields (that I’m aware of). For this project I did a deep dive into the literature on both ends. A primary resource was Regenerative Development and Design by the Regenesis Group, which is a recent publication that is full of profound insights and principles that I have been working to apply to LXD in unique and exciting ways.
I fleshed this out a bit in the interactive guide I published, and am also working with the development team at Gaia U to experiment with a potential-centered final activity for our free introductory course. For this we have re-designed the Lean Canvas, an early-stage artifact in the lean design framework (which is problem-centered), which functions as a rapid business plan used to facilitate conversations with potential stakeholders and generate early feedback.
The series of exercises I created in my 7 Principles… guide has the learner explore the nested living systems to which they belong (teams, families, organizations, neighborhoods, communities, fields, bioregions, etc.). By first imagining the potential of the larger system in a future state, for example the Earth system, learners can begin to zoom in and ask: how did this system support the larger system to evolve toward this state of abundance and well-being? What role(s) has it played?
In doing so, the learner is able to orient themselves through the lens of these nested roles, discovering not just which roles they are interested in learning into, but why — seeing how these roles are connected to a big picture of contributing to a thriving Earth system. This creates context, allowing the learning experience to become situated (see Situated Learning Theory in Annotated Resources) and personalized for the learners unique stories and circumstances.
Storytelling and Narrative are also a primary focus of mine for this approach. At Gaia U, the Life and Career (LCR) module has learners explore their own stories and transitions before they work to design their learning pathway. As a former literature major, I have been very interested in the role of story and myth in shaping culture, identity and behavior for a long time. My own experience with the LCR at Gaia U was quite powerful, and has inspired me to bring this further into the field of learning experience design.
One exciting place this ties back into the integration with regenerative design is with the work of the Regenesis Group, which uses a framework called The Story of Place for their project work. This inspired me in my approach to learning experience design by helping learners see living systems as stories nested within one another, to explore these stories, and to create a sense of agency to help shape them.
Ultimately, to paraphrase Regensis co-founder Bill Reed, the regenerative narrative is about humanity embracing its potential to make the planet better — more diverse, more beautiful, healthier, more abundance — than would be possible without human presence. This is a powerful vision, running counter to most of the dominant narratives in modern society, which tend to paint human activity as inherently destructive (as seen in religious doctrines or even in the ‘do less harm’ campaign of the sustainability movement).
Many of the 7 Principles from the interactive guide I published were inspired by the regenerative approach to development and design:
1) Become an actualizer of living systems.
2) Design for Co-Evolution
3) Focus on Potential Over Problems
4) Explore Stories to Reveal Patterns
5) Create Learning Experience Designers
6) Guide Learners into Unique, Value-Adding Roles
7) Create Space for Self-Organization and Emergence
I also integrated thinking from several other disciplines, including:
- Living Systems Theory (James Grier Miller)
- Living Systems Thinking (Charles Krone)
- Systems View (Fritjof Capra)
- Permaculture (Bill Mollison and David Holmgren)
- Theory of Evolution of Consciousness (Robert Kegan)
- Theory of Self-Authorship (Baxter Magolda)
- Transition Theory (Nancy Schlossberg)
- Integral Theory (Ken Wilber)
- Evolutionary Psychology
- Evolutionary Biology
- Santiago Theory of Cognition (Maturana and Varela)
Another fundamental theory to Gaia U’s approach is that of Action Learning, originated by Reginald Revans (Gaia U degrees are accredited through Revans University).
There is a lot of inspiring aspects of this theory, including ‘unlearning’ old patterns of thought and action that are no longer serving, and the role of coaching/mentoring. One criticism I have, based on my integration with a regenerative design approach, is its problem-centered nature. I see this as a very interesting edge to push, as many learning and design approaches are problem centered, whereas the authors of Regenerative Development and Design promote focusing on potential over problems.
My goal is to work to expand on the existing theory of Transformative Learning, to think about how learning experiences can function to transform living systems. This starts with creating a new story for humanity, one in which we have a mutually-beneficial relationship with the planet, and then working to re-shape our stories on smaller scales oriented by this larger collective vision.
The ways technology is changing our relationship with information and the ways in which we learn is also fundamental to this work. Dan Pink’s book A Whole New Mind has been influential — in it he describes how we are transitioning out of the Information Age, where learning (and much work) was focused on the analytical left-hemisphere of the brain, to a new age (he calls the Conceptual Age) where we will be required to master new skills that involve a more integrated brain — integrating more right-hemisphere activities such as design, story, symphony (systems thinking), meaning and play.
The book mBraining by Grant Suskaloo and Marvin Oka helped me to expand that concept even further, exploring how our ‘other two brains’ (our heart and gut brains) are involved in learning and influencing behavior. Their research is fascinating, validating the common ideas that we should ‘follow our hearts’ or ‘trust our guts’. Learning in the new age of complex challenges will require that we think and act as whole human beings.
This is very much in line with Living Systems Theory (Miller), Chilean biologists Maturana and Varela’s work on living systems and cognition (Santiago Theory of Cognition), and James Lovelock’s Gaia Theory. From cells to organs to organisms to teams, organizations, communities, and up to the planet Earth, all living systems are engaging in a continuous process of learning, adaptation and co-evolution. As I state in the 7 Principles guide, when we create learning experiences, we do so for all levels of living systems simultaneously.
With this new technology there are new opportunities for all of us to take control of our own learning and development, and to become learning experience designers capable of supporting living systems to reach their potential for diversity, abundance, beauty and well-being. This idea is at the heart of the 'Living & Learning by Design' course and the mission of the Wired Roots enterprise.